V-Twin Forum banner

61 - 72 of 72 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,945 Posts
hillcat, I know exactly how you feel. 4 years ago I felt exactly the same way. Things are different now.
Maybe different for you but not me. So what part of "to each their own" do you have a problem with?
abqjammer is a preacher that not only believes it is his God given right to scold people but it is actually his Christian duty to so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
958 Posts
I don't understand your antagonism, Why do you think I have a problem with "to each their own" when I stated that I understand your situation, Ive been there? I understand, however I have changed, sounds like you have a problem with me feeling different now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,300 Posts
Think about this, though, HOW are you, who say you're following Christ, supposed to share the "gifts" of the Holy Spirit, which Paul said EVERY believer gets, in different ways, and which are intended to "build up" or "edify" other believers, if you're never AROUND other believers in church?
Think about this, though, HOW are you, who say you're following Christ, supposed to share the "gifts" of the Holy Spirit, which Paul said EVERY believer gets, in different ways, and which are intended to "build up" or "edify" other believers, if you're never AROUND other believers in church? When you're always by yourself, you CAN'T "help" other believers grow or be better in their walk with God. Also, you're "separating" yourself from the rest of the "body", like cutting off a finger or hand. How then is the "body"/church supposed to hold onto anything or grip anything without you? If you don't go to any church, you can't help make them better, right? If those churches don't want to listen to you or accept your "gift" of the Spirit, then go to one that will. There are PLENTY out there, I'm sure. However, as others have pointed out, not EVERYONE in church is "perfect", and there will be MANY who do NOT do things right or are hypocrites. That actually means that YOU are NEEDED there, to "help" them grow and become BETTER believers; to NOT be hypocrites. When you abandon them to their incorrect beliefs, and leave them without correcting them, you "doom" them, in a way, to CONTINUE in those bad ideas and beliefs, and KEEP ON turning OTHERS away, too. Instead of leaving Church to it's hypocrisy, go and CHANGE it by SHOWING them the RIGHT way to do things, sharing those "gifts" that the Spirit has given you. Only God can change ANYONE, so let Him do that through YOU.
Thanks for reienforcing my point
Think about this, though, HOW are you, who say you're following Christ, supposed to share the "gifts" of the Holy Spirit, which Paul said EVERY believer gets, in different ways, and which are intended to "build up" or "edify" other believers, if you're never AROUND other believers in church? When you're always by yourself, you CAN'T "help" other believers grow or be better in their walk with God. Also, you're "separating" yourself from the rest of the "body", like cutting off a finger or hand. How then is the "body"/church supposed to hold onto anything or grip anything without you? If you don't go to any church, you can't help make them better, right? If those churches don't want to listen to you or accept your "gift" of the Spirit, then go to one that will. There are PLENTY out there, I'm sure. However, as others have pointed out, not EVERYONE in church is "perfect", and there will be MANY who do NOT do things right or are hypocrites. That actually means that YOU are NEEDED there, to "help" them grow and become BETTER believers; to NOT be hypocrites. When you abandon them to their incorrect beliefs, and leave them without correcting them, you "doom" them, in a way, to CONTINUE in those bad ideas and beliefs, and KEEP ON turning OTHERS away, too. Instead of leaving Church to it's hypocrisy, go and CHANGE it by SHOWING them the RIGHT way to do things, sharing those "gifts" that the Spirit has given you. Only God can change ANYONE, so let Him do that through YOU.
Thanks for Particularizing my point, you helped me nail it.(y)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter #64
Because no matter the way you choose to describe it, it is exactly what is meant by "socialist economic policy" verses a free market economy that our country operates under.

Try this one and see how you like it.
Think about Obamacare as stabilizing the healthcare needs of the uninsured.

If I can pay for farmers to stay solvent, then you can pay for the sick to be well.
In the mid 60's my dads cousin owned thousands of acres ( I was around 10) and he let us Pheasant hunt on these grounds..... He told my Dad he made more money from the government who paid him to NOT plant and grow anything on this property than what he made farming the rest....
Shall we blame Kennedy, or Johnson for this one???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,945 Posts
I don't understand your antagonism, Why do you think I have a problem with "to each their own" when I stated that I understand your situation, Ive been there? I understand, however I have changed, sounds like you have a problem with me feeling different now.
Hold on... I said "to each their own" and you said "I used to feel that way but I've changed."
That would indicate that you no longer feel like everyone should be able to follow (or not) the Lord in their own way.
I have no problem with you feeling different now. To each their own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
614 Posts
In the mid 60's my dads cousin owned thousands of acres ( I was around 10) and he let us Pheasant hunt on these grounds..... He told my Dad he made more money from the government who paid him to NOT plant and grow anything on this property than what he made farming the rest....
Shall we blame Kennedy, or Johnson for this one???
Your fable has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

Your lack of historical knowledge really shines though.
Farm subsidy policy of payments for not planting was implemented in the years following the great depression.
Which has nothing to do with Kennedy or Johnson.
 

·
Make me use my bullet?
Joined
·
12,862 Posts
Think about ag subsidies as stabilizing our food supply. Farmers need to over produce in order to give us a reserve food supply. Over production of any product leads to lower prices, often below cost of production. We need a good reserve of food in case of drought or some severe plant disease outbreak such as corn or wheat blight. If there is a shortage of machines such as cars, the auto maker can expand the line or add workers ect and have an adequate supply in a matter of weeks. In case of over production they can shut down a line and have the supply demand issue solved rather quickly. This is not the case with our food supply, It takes months of ideal weather conditions to produce more food. I live in an agricultural area and see how farmers are struggling.
I'm not sure this is 100% accurate.

For one thing, not all subsidies go to food producing crops. Cotton is in the top 5 subsidized crops and much of it is exported to China. Corn is also in the top 5 and we know a bunch of that goes in our gas tanks.

Secondly, in order to get both parties on-board for these subsidy bills, the farm aid bills are always tied to funding for food stamps. As one goes up in funding the other follows.

Thirdly, the subsidies go against the basis of capitalism just as much in farming as in any other business. Handouts stifle innovation and conservation. Also like other industries, the subsidies in farming seem to find their way mostly to the big corporate type farms rather than those who used to be the backbone of agriculture.

Fourth, the existence of these subsidies is proof of the prominent K Street presence of the Ag industry, just like all those other special interest groups that we hate dictating our legislation behind the scenes.

Lastly, most of these crop prices are impacted by futures trading on Wall Street as much as any other factor. There are far too many hands in the pockets of the farmers even before there are seeds in the ground to think that this subsidy is all about "food supply".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,807 Posts
Duuude might be misinformed as he was only 10 and didn't know if it was state or federal that paid. In south jersey homeowners who had 10 acres or more planted trees in straight lines and said they had a tree farm. They received subsidies from the state and paid lower property taxes, because they had a farm.

Sent from my moto g(7) supra using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter #69
Your fable has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

Your lack of historical knowledge really shines though.
Farm subsidy policy of payments for not planting was implemented in the years following the great depression.
Which has nothing to do with Kennedy or Johnson.
Duuude might be misinformed as he was only 10 and didn't know if it was state or federal that paid. In south jersey homeowners who had 10 acres or more planted trees in straight lines and said they had a tree farm. They received subsidies from the state and paid lower property taxes, because they had a farm.

Sent from my moto g(7) supra using Tapatalk
I know exactly what I said and how it compares to what the narcistic pompous A$$ wipe replied with.. Just like how many friends this loser has, will be how many replies he gets from me.....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
19,739 Posts
The trouble with American farmers is banks. They get talked into carrying to much debt load, and the moment things go wrong, they have to file for bankruptcy.

And don't think that farm support does much to help small farmers. The lions share is gobbled up by large corporations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,953 Posts
And don't think that farm support does much to help small farmers. The lions share is gobbled up by large corporations.
That's because there aren't many "small" farmers left. Large corporations own the lion's share of the acreage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,807 Posts
I know exactly what I said and how it compares to what the narcistic pompous A$$ wipe replied with.. Just like how many friends this loser has, will be how many replies he gets from me.....
You are assuming he is a he might be he is a woman. That would explain a lot.

Sent from my moto g(7) supra using Tapatalk
 
61 - 72 of 72 Posts
Top